I was pretty excited when I came across Le Fanu's book as I had read somewhere that he was one of the originators of gothic literature. Perhaps I am not used to the pace of Victorian novels, but Le Fanu's book was too draggy for me. I am not even sure it was very suspenseful at all. Too many minor characters also spolit the book for me -- was Captain Oakley only in the novel to show off the naivety of Maud? The mystery of Uncle Silas wasn't very engaging and I was just dying to get to the end of the novel just so I could move on to other things. The ending of the book is also predictable, and Uncle Silas basically lived up to his horrible reputation.

This is a real rip-snorter of a gothic novel. Eighteen-year-old Maude, whose mother is dead, has been raised by her wealthy father, an adherent to a peculiar Scandinavian science religion. There are dark rumors afoot about the character of Maude's father's brother, the mysterious Uncle Silas, into whose guardianship Maude is entrusted at her father's death. Maude is the only thing standing between the money she will inherit from her father (when she comes of age) and Silas' considerable debt. Laudanum addiction, poison, big old houses with uninhabited wings, a creepy cousin (Silas' son), and an evil French governess: if you like gothic novels, this one's got it all.

Joseph Sheridan (J. S.) LeFanu, despite fame in Victorian times, has mostly fallen off the radar of modern readers. His superlative "Uncle Silas" is clear evidence as to why anyone who loves a good yarn will be immediately drawn in by his considerable gifts. This novel has a well-modulated dark atmosphere, clearly drawn and fully human characters and a superb plot.

The titular Silas is the uncle of our heroine Maud Ruthyn, who becomes the ward of her mysterious uncle upon her father's death. Silas has an unsavory reputation, having once been accused of murdering a man to whom he owed a gambling debt, but he has, by the time Maud first meets him, apparently repented and found religion. She goes to his home willingly, quickly befriends his saucy daughter Milly and is, for the most part, happy in her new surroundings. The plot thickens from there, and without giving away important details, the reader should know that LeFanu lets loose with a ripping good story that ends most satisfactorily and with some wonderful twists.

LeFanu is a skilled writer at the apex of his powers and an astute observer of the human condition. Some of the more telling lines exhibiting his gifts include:

" . . . that lady has a certain spirit of opposition within her, and to disclose a small wish of any sort was generally, if it lay in her power, to prevent its accomplishment."

"Already I was sorry to lose him. So soon we begin to make a property of what pleases us."

"People grow to be friends by liking, Madame, and liking comes of itself, not by bargain."

"She had received a note from Papa. He had had the impudence to forgive HER for HIS impertinence."

"In very early youth, we do not appreciate the restraints which act upon malignity, or know how effectually fear protects us where conscience is wanting."

"One of the terrible dislocations of our habits of mind respecting the dead is that our earthly future is robbed of them, and we thrown exclusively upon retrospect."

" 'The world,' he resumed after a short pause, 'has no faith in any man's conversion; it never forgets what he was, it never believes him anything better, it is an inexorable and stupid judge.' "

" . . . I had felt, in the whirl and horror of my mind, on the very point of submitting, just as nervous people are said to throw themselves over precipices through sheer dread of falling."

Admirers of Wilkie Collins, Thomas Hardy and, to a lesser degree, of Charles Dickens will find much to please them in the classic "Uncle Silas."

This novel has received less attention in the U.S. than some of Hardy's other works, such an The Mayor Of Casterbridge, w ith its theme of the individual in tragic conflict with fate. The Woodlanders dwells on the needless sufferings and unhappiness brought on by class privelege. This is a subject always sure to raise suspicions of membership in the Khmer Rouge or the North Korean Secret Police here in the holyland of capitalism. But it is a beautiful work of art. Henry James and Jacques Barzun sneered at it because of its attacks on the upper classes. But that is a mark in its favor. Anything opposed by those two must be on the side of progress and human emancipation.

Unlike some of Hardy's other classic works, such as The Mayor of Casterbridge, with its theme of "the individual" against "fate," The Woodlanders has received little attention in this country. Perhaps that is because it deals so strongly with the themes of class privelege and class conflict, usually associated in this holy land of capitalism with the Khmer Rouge and Stalin. But it is a magnificent and rewarding work of art. Jacques Barzun and Henry James sneered at it because of its hostile treatment of the upper classes, but that is a mark in its favor. Anything opposed by those two must stand for progress and human emancipation.

This is one of my favourite Hardy novels. As some others have noted, it's not one of the "big 5" but certainly worth reading. Hardy's descriptions of the woodlands are beautiful, and I found the ending to be one of his most unpredictable. I wouldn't recommend reading it if you are feeling down, as the ending is sooooo wonderfully tragic (hehe), or if you're not a fan of Hardy's prose style, but otherwise it's a wonderful read. Very personal as well. I got the feeling it was written just for me :)

Romola is constantly called Eliot's weakest novel, with even serious critics reluctant to praise it. However, it was seen in the 19th century as Eliot's masterpiece. Some of the blame for the novel going out of fashion must rest with F.R. Leavis who said that "few will want to read Romola a second time, and few can ever have got through it once without some groans." If Leavis, viewed as one of the great literary minds, thinks this, then more average readers like us are bound to be put off.

True, the start of Romola is bogged down in detail, but it is introduced by a wonderful, stirring and majestic 'Proem' which sees the Angel of the Dawn sweeping across the Earth and loftily states how humanity is the same now as it was when Romola is set. After this, the notes are best ignored - consult them separately, and concentrate on getting into the book. It is a stirring and sometimes hard read, and moves one with awe at what Eliot has created - you really feel you are experiencing Florence in the 15th century. There is one scene that stands out for me - the haunting and almost surreal episode where Romola drifts by boat to an apparent coastal haven. Images of peace and life are reversed disturbingly.

So ignore Leavis and the dissenters. If you've read another Eliot, you'll like it. If you haven't, maybe start with something else, but come back, for it's a rewarding read

Given the majority of Eliot readers begin with Middlemarch, I found myself in the unique position of not only beginning with Romola, but also on a subject that I find most interesting. That of Renaissance Italy. Beginning at the death of the great Lorenzo di Medici in '92 I read this great novel twice. Once quickly as any other Twenty-First century paperback; the second, slowly, with more respect for the intellectual scope within the pages.
After the first attempt I was mildly disappointed. I came away with no true sense of the whole that is fifteenth century Florence and a bewilderment at the inconsistent central characterisation of Tito Melema and his golden-haired wife, Romola. The supporting actors were brilliant, from Fra Girolama's fantatical Catholicism to Bratti's salesmanship. But I was left disappointed, believing in the superficality of Tito, the maddening naivety of Tessa, and the almost puritanical martyrdom of Romola.
So I re-read it. Slowly.
It is now extremely clear why this great work of english literature is, as Eliot herself puts it, a "book of mine which I more thoroughly feel that I swear by every sentence as having been written with my best blood".
Each scene is mesmerically depicted, the infintesimal attention to details and Eliot's total control of her subject matter shines through.
Renaissance Florence wasn't so well depicted by its contemporaries.
From Tito's waking at the Loggia de' Cerchi to his final fall at the Ponte Vecchio his character moves through a full range as you would expect from a man in his early twenties. His child-like mesmerism coupled with his Greek tutorage gives rise to a cherubic man whom Florence loves. His fatal flaw is his desire for love and a single terrible lie he gives that, like Murphy's Law, evolves into a a stigma that alters his very persona. What is all the more damaging is that you truly believe he is unaware of the pain he causes. He is truly egocentric, in an almost blameless way. For Romola, you cold argue the opposite. Indeed she is potentially more culpable. Her fierce intellectualism is offset by a descent into a world of religious supersition, a world where religion is used as a political tool. Throughout she has the knowledge of where her actions will take her and a terrible sense of duty and restrains her. From the beginning, with the story we hear so often of Tito's escape from drowning, to his final near drowning at the hands of the mob, to his strangulation by his father there is a certain bitter justice until all that he leaves is his proud and world-scarred wife Romola and the innocence that he preserved with Tessa. Tito's move from innocent 'hero' to startled villain is an excerise in human failings. Yet it is not a sufficient single human tragedy, as Eliot says, "Florence was busy with greater affairs, and the preparation of a deeper tragedy".
In many respects 'Romola' is Eliot's King Lear. The parallels are many, including Baldessare's depiction. There is no Edgar, nor Edmund but the Fool is here in many guises. In taking one of Shakespeare's finest themes, Eliot has given true life to fifteenth century Florence and it is, perhaps, best encapsulated by Romola's final statement to Tessa's son, Lillo:
"There was a man to whom I was very near... who made almost everyone fond of him, for he ws young, and clever, and beautiful...I believe, when I first knew him, he never thought of anything cruel or base. But because he tried to slip away from everything that was unpleasant, and cared for nothing else so much as his own safety, he came at last to commit some of the basest deeds - such as make men infamous."
So, Eliot's 'Romola'. Read it, delight in it because it truly is, as the author can rightly claim, one of the finest works in english literature.

Yes, it bristles with Glossaries and Appendices and Notes like so much barbed wire. (And if you actually read the Penguin editor's introduction, it's a sure thing you'll never read the novel: she makes it sound like about as much fun as chewing rocks.) But don't let all that deter you. You may have some rough going at the beginning, mostly because Latin and Greek scholarship is so important to the plot. Use the notes and they'll enhance your enjoyment of the story, but ignore them and you're still in for a thrilling tale gorgeously told. Tito Melema is one of the great characters in fiction, and he's someone we all know: a thoroughly despicable human being who has no idea he's anything but a nice guy. Eliot has wrought a dreamy and hair-raising hybrid of fiction and history, infused with her own astonishing insight and complicated sympathy and delivered in her matchless prose. I loved this book.

When Hesketh Pearson sat down to write a book about the most witty people in history (including the likes of Swift, Wilde, Shaw, and Beerbohm), he made the decision that Chesterton should go last in the book. He was undoubtedly one of the most delightful critics of the modern era, and "The Ball and the Cross" is amongst his best.

The story about two adversaries has a particular point to make. Two people who believe in very different things have one major thing in common over the majority of people: namely, they believe in something. Here, two men are so fervent in their beliefs that they wish to duel to the death, but end up as best friends due to their isolation amongst relativists.

The story was actually based off Chesterton's relationship with George Bernard Shaw. This is simply a delightful read and even more relevant today than ever before.

So many people wrote great reviews of GKC's best-known books here that I'll concentrate on this one. It happens to be my favorite novel by him, but I was quite surprised that this nearly unknown book would be so good. My suggestion is don't read Martin Gardner's foreword first--read it as a backword, after the book, and then see if you agree.

Chesterton later wrote a little poem about how he didn't like this book, and how it didn't make any sense, but I found it to be the clearest thing I've ever read, and it has forever instilled lucid pictures in my brain. It starts with a scene that seems to be some sort of dizzying science-fiction story from Victorian England--sort of like something Jules Verne would write if he suddenly became a better writer.

That's not the only unforgettable visual image in this book, which is pieced together like so many cliff-hanger serials. Someone else will likely write about all the debates over points of view implicit in the title and fiercely held by the characters, but what attracts me is the excitement of a widly heroic life (which both characters live). GK shows, of course, that it's found in the romance of orthodoxy, but by the time the book winds up, he has me panting like a thirsty horse to find those cooling streams.

Another novel that does this is Manalive!, which a friend of mine said is her second favorite book, next to C.S.Lewis' Perelandra. Manalive! is very light, but it just flies, and opens with the most intriguing first page I've ever read. Both these stories, although written in different ways, seem modern or even post-modern. They seem like they were translated into modern English from another language, even though they both date from the early 20th Century.

Recently, I had the chance to see the world premiere of a play of The Man Who Was Thursday, which put these three novels into perspective for me. Chesterton wrote at a time when anarchist dynamiters --the terrorists of their day--were causing havoc about London. Many social conditions were chaotic and in the world of ideas, things were up for grabs.

Chesterton did not have an easy conversion, nor did he come by his views without a hard-won struggle. In this sense, he didn't arrive at the "right" answer by working a puzzle or stumbling on the secret to life, but like his story about a man who walked around the world, came back with a new perspective, able to see things in a new way for the first time. Although I did come to embrace his romantic orthodoxy, I don't think his big gift is in convincing us of the wisdom of the Creed, but rather in opening our eyes to the wonder around us.

That's what my 17 year old tutoring student told me this week. He's been quoting the book around school and is absolutely enchanted with it. Note, this kid is no slouch intellectually, he's on the state championship debate team and has read such things as Dante's Inferno, and Huxley's Brave New World, so the best thing he's ever read is high praise.

I think what makes this book so good is the paradoxical quality of the situation. The action carries you forward as the two main characters attempt to duel about truth and are continually thwarted by a constabulary and a citizenship who don't (for the most part, that is) want them to fight. The paradox is that these men are sane, but the world thinks them mad. It reminds one of Emily Dickinson's poem "Much Madness is divinest Sense"
and the society the characters are in does deem them dangerous.

What is amazing to me is that Chesterton wrote this book in 1905, but it could almost have been written yesterday, at least in terms of people's attitudes. The descriptions are unusual, some of the people quite odd, yet the whole story becomes believable in a very strange way. And it is both intriguing and amusing at the same time.

This is the second teenager I've recommended this to and both of them have loved it. Maybe the teenagers I know just have better taste than most of the librarians out there, since this is a nearly impossible book to find on any library shelves around here. Thanks Amazon for making it so easy to purchase. I've just ordered a copy for my teenaged niece for her birthday. Maybe the American Chesterton Society should start a branch for teens...

This story of a man who was on the top of the world after being selected to carry the Olympic Tourch twice. A tragic life threating bike accident all but takes his life. Then the struggle he endured to over come the injuries. A true example of mind over matter.

THIS BOOK SHOWS A GOOD EXAMPLE OF DETERMINATION AND WILLPOWER THAT CAN BE USED IN DAILY LIFE SITUATIONS.

This book is an inspiration for anyone facing a trial in their life. Through tremendous faith, will, and determination, the author demonstrates the mind's ability to face and overcome the body's limitations.

Signs Of Psychic And Spiritual Ability by practicing psychiatrist Mitchell E. Gibson (Director of Education and Research, Astrological Institute of Scottsdale) is the second in the Sign Series of books and steeped in the modern contemporary astrological research. Individual chapters address the definition and biology of psychic and spiritual phenomena, astrological signs that indicate psychic ability, and correlations between astrology and paranormal talent, and much more. Dr. Gibson's Signs Of Psychic And Spiritual is a truly fascinating and informative presentation. Also highly recommended is Dr. Gibson's earlier work, Signs Of Mental Illness: An Astrological And Psychiatric Breakthrough (Llewellyn, 1567183026 ...).

I have been reading books about astrology for years and to date
I have not found a great deal written about spiritual potential and the aspects. And voila!! Dr. Gibson has written what I consider to be a true classic in this field. The way that he synthesizes his personal experiences about life and the world from his psychiatry practice with his software is insightful, visionary, and in short, brilliant. His website intrigued me when he added the tour of the Spiritual Sky software. That showed me everything that the software was capable of. I truly hope that he will continue to produce products that address the gap between the metaphysical and astrology!!!

I called him and asked if he were going to produce a relationship package. Just as luck would have it, he is in the process of creating a program called the Intimate Sky. I love the way the programs allow you some flexibility in relearning the art of astrology. I also like his new vision of the sky as a living breathing being!!

Dr. Gibson has out done himself again. This book shows Dr. Gibson's kind, caring, generous and loving soul. I have read many books about astrology, Dr. Gibson has done extensive studies, and has worded his entire book, so everyone can understand, even a child, as my daughter has read this book as well. She loved it, in fact, her exact words were . " Mom, this book is amazing." I have recommended this book to all of my colleagues, as well as friends and family. I recommend all of Dr. Gibson's work to everyone, including his software, entitled , " The Spiritual Sky," and "The Inner Sky." Dr. Gibson also has a series of meditation CD's that are exquisite.

Sax Rohmer's work has been compared to Arthur Conan Doyle's often enough that I felt compelled to check it out, and discover more about Fu-Manchu beyond what I already knew about the character (that a certain kind of 1970's moustache was named after him).

At one time the West was terrified of "Young China", and the forces at work in China that could conceivably have led to a radical alteration of the world's power structures. The Chinese were the bad guys because they were "inscrutable" (love that word!), and therefore frightening.

Without a doubt, the view of the author is rather dated, in his obvious bias against the Chinese (or at least they were handy villains for him). His constant allusions to the "Yellow Peril" and the unspeakable dangers posed to the white race by the yellow is in keeping with the times (1913), but a bit overboard nevertheless.

The book is more of a series of sketchy, running battles between the sinister Fu-Manchu and hero Smith rather than a standard, cohesive narrative. This should come as no surprise since the author cobbled together several of his Fu-Manchu short stories into this one single volume. However, the results of this process are mixed, and not totally effective. Not that it really matters, since this novel was successful enough to call for more and better stories with the homicidal genius.

This particular edition (Dover Classic Mysteries), is very inexpensive, and well worth the price of admission to experience the debut of Fu-Manchu, and to learn something about the social attitudes of the time in which he was created.

Insidious, he certainly is. Yes, he certainly is insidious. And to think he's a doctor, as well!

Fu Manchu is an outdated, appallingly politically-incorrect criminal mastermind who, in this intro to the author's famous series, basically goes on a killing spree to eliminate anyone even remotely threatening his plans for world domination. This simple plot device creates a fast-moving romp, but it does mean that brave and noble protagonist Nayland Smith, teamed with Petrie, the story's narrator, is mostly on defense throughout. If they are not trying to prevent a murder, then they are trying to solve a murder that has been done in some exotic way dreamed up by the elusive Fu. There are scads of locked-room or related scenarios popping up like done toast all through the story, and the reader is usually trying, along with Smith and Petrie, to figure out what poisonous creature got loosed in a dead fellow's study, or what trained killer, human or beast, made those weird marks out on the windowsill, three floors up.

Meanwhile, Fu Manchu is thankfully not one of those megalomaniacs who blindly trusts his lackeys to do all the dirty work; the big man himself is occasionally "on site" meaning the heroes can try to put the grab on him before he pulls a vanishing act. He is adept at slipping away, though, and has a knack for disguise. But the best parts of the book are arguably when Fu Manchu is directly confronting the heroes, sometimes when he's got them helpless.

So the book is essentially a frenzied cat-and-mouse game, not much slower than air whooshing out of a bellows. The better to tempt you on to the next installment, I suppose. For sex appeal, there is the good-guys' help on the inside: beautiful and exotic Karamaneh, she of the curves, who emerges from disguise, or the shadows, just long enough to intoxicate our narrator with her charms, and pass along snippets of info that keep Smith and Petrie on her master's trail. But--can she be trusted, or is Fu Manchu's hold on her too great? Once it becomes clear just how the evil genius keeps her in thrall, naturally our noble do-gooders seek to set her free.

This plot twist, among others, speeds us to our conclusion, where finally our staunch defenders of the free (that means British) world manage to go, definitively, on the offensive. A shame their own sense of honour, even in the face of a master villain, keeps them from fighting dirty, while said villain has no such qualms. The lesson: don't get stuck in such a position where you have promised Fu Manchu you'll put your gun down, because if you're an English Gentleman, you'll have to keep that oath (or feel just terrible about yourself later that night...assuming you survived after putting your gun down and hoping Fu's henchman will drop his knife).

Lots of thrills, a world famous villain, loads of politically incorrect descriptions of various races, murders and deathtraps, opium and assassination. It's all here, waiting to be breezed through before you have time to really pick at it.

I must say that I blush in confessing that reading this book gave me the chills.

One way to gauge a story is by the force of antagonism raised against the hero. In this book, the force of antagonism is perfectly ominous, artfully deadly, and rancidly horrific--the Insidious Dr. Fu-Manchu rouses high expectations, and chapter after chapter it exceeds them. Everything that you would want from a mystery/suspense/action/adventure novel is here in this book, and it is here in high doses.

Brimming with intrigue, romance, mystery, murder, mayhem, zaps, traps, pitfalls, poisons, hair-breadth escapes and miraculous revivals, the 'Insidious Dr. Fu-Manchu' grabs you from the start and doesn't let you go 'til the end, and by that time you're so intoxicated from the deep pleasure this book has provided that you either A: Read this book again, and/or B: Yearn to get your hands on copies of the next books in the series (which, unfortunately, are hard to come by these days).

Have I mentioned that this book gave me the chills? Chills, thrills, and the greatest of heart-pounding, nail-biting, deviously sublime episodes of reading you'll ever have. Great fun!

Penrod Schofield is a very bad little boy. Well it is not even that he is a bad child it is just that he gets blamed for every thing that happens; for instance when his sisters dress disappears and ends up in dukes dog house and Penrod got blamed for it even though duke took it. He enjoys writing, and playing with his dog Duke who is almost always with him. Penrod thinks of himself as the class clown and tends not to be very truthful. Penrod has an unimportant role in the school production of The Round Table, but do not tell him that because he thinks if he dose not go the show will not go on with out him. Through out the book Penrod grows up a lot in my opinion for example he tell his father the truth at the end of the book which I did not think would happen. He does get in a lot of trouble whether it's eating too much candy or squealing on his sister.

I did not like Penrod because it was in my opinion aimed more for boys and not as much towards girls or maybe it was just me but I was not entertained through out the whole book. There were most definitely parts I liked for example parts were Penrod is in conversation; one part I did not like was the excerpts from Penrod's book about how Mr. Wilson is killed. I liked the conversational parts because through out the book you are kind of in Penrod's head, and I did not like that. But in conversation you sort of get both views from both people not just what Penrod thinks. Don't lie because no one will believe you even if you are right, that is the moral of this story. I hope my review helped.

The Penrod series of novels is one of the most effective evocations of the experience of being a child ever written. They deal with the daily life and trials of a boy of eleven and twelve in turn of the century (1900) Indiana. The humor is found in the petty hypocrisies of the adults and the naivete of the children and how those two things intertwine. If you have ever day-dreamed in school or yearned for the favor of the prettiest girl in your class, you will appreciate these stories. NB. They are period pieces of the purest kind, so you should expect terms and attitudes to reflect the age from which they come.

"Penrod" is a great novel -- interesting, enlightening, profound, grandiloquent and one of the most hilarious books ever written.

Aspects of the subject matter, however, while generally accepted in the early 1900s and treated kindly herein by the author, would simply not fly under today's political-correctness coercion. As far as popular literature is concerned, it is effectively a banned book. Consequently, "Penrod" eventually will fade from general literary consciousness, and linger only in the memories of those who truly appreciate a fine novel.

That reader from Chicago has got to be kidding!! Besides GIBSON admits in his younger days he was very obnoxious so whats the big secret?? The book reads extremely well even if your not a GIBSON fan.The book also shows that with DRIVE and DETERMINATION you can be a success in almost anything!! A great book for youngsters to read!!!Remember GIBSON wasn't a natural gifted athlete at baseball he excelled because he would not give up!!I wish the TIGERS had a whole team of GIBSONS!!Think of what a great country we would have if we had more people with GIBSONS attitude and drive to not give in to the BEAST of defeat! (transam_92584@yahoo.com)

I found this to be an exceptional book. I personally am a big Kirk Gibson fan. I was able to learn alot about one of the most intense baseball players of the modern era. A great book for collectors or any sports fan in general

Is what the excited announcer on TV repeated after Gibby limped to the plate and banged the greatest homer in Game 1 World Series history.

Gibby was obnoxious. He was cocky. But as he grew older, he became humble and even friendly. You can read about this epiphany in this book. Packed with great photos.

For anyone who saw Gibby play football at MSU -- single handedly beating Michigan in 1978 -- or charge his way around the basepaths at Tiger Stadium, there has to be admiration. He hit more clutch homeruns than anyone. He was a competitor, a leader and a winner.

I'll set the record straight first: I'm American, and I know Nesbit was English. That accounts for some of the references being undecipherable. Also, she wrote about 100 years ago. That accounts for more of the references being undecipherable. And lastly, I know that it's almost impossible for any two people (say, Nesbit and me) to have read all the same books and have all the same cultural references in our heads. That accounts for some of the references being undecipherable.

I was rereading this the other night and idly decided to make a note of every reference that I didn't understand. Through a 242-page book, I found 24 references. My husband is English, so I checked some of these with him on the off chance that some of them were still going concerns in the UK today...most of them weren't. Here are a few things we couldn't figure out. I'm paraphrasing because my notes are here but my book is not.

"You know let dogs delight"

"What happened to the guinea pig? Of course you know the answer to that." (There was no reference to a guinea pig in the discussion under way.)

"Tourbillon"

"Boys of England" books

"The red deer that Edward shot...we were Children of the New Forest..."

"Gaboriau"

"Going to Klondike"

There are more, but that's kind of the gist of it. Anyway, despite all this, the book is still an OK read and the kids do some entertaining things a la typical Nesbit. That's why it got 3 stars instead of only 1.

The Treasure seekers is a story about a small group of children who try and earn money to help their father (an unsuccessful businessman). The children, along the way, meet lots of characters in turn-of-the-century England. Nesbit really understands children and can write delightfully about them. There are lots of very funny episodes in tbe book.

Nonetheless, this is not Nesbit's best work. Enchanted Castle, Five Children and It, Phoenix and the Carpet are better, since they also incorporate magic. This book is also distinctly unPC in some places, for instance in its description of a Jewish character (he's a miserly moneylender), and is to that extent a product of its times.

How would you solve your money problems? The 6 Bastable children find inventive ways to make a shilling or two. They dig for treasure, kidnap a neighbor, write and sell poetry, and more. Best of all, they don't go to school. What could be more fun? Spying on a politician, perhaps?